olyflyer wrote:
Jacques Cornell wrote:
olyflyer wrote:
Jacques Cornell wrote:
The larger sensor's DR advantage applies only with moving subjects.
That's a bit of a simplification.... a joke which shows that you don't know what you are talking about. DR advantages are ALWAYS advantages. Period.
That's a bit of a simplification... a joke which shows that you don't know what you are talking about.
DR advantages are ALWAYS advantages. Period. If you don't see that then you really don't know what you are talking about.
I get more DR from a 5-frame bracket with MFT than you get from a single capture with a 35mm sensor.
Did I say anything else? I never claimed this NOT being the case, but to claim that "DR advantage applies only with moving subjects" is simply nonsense.
Results are results. The infinitesimally small amount of additional work I have to do to get these results 1) is no burden at all, and 2) saves me thousands of dollars and several pounds of weight by letting me use a smaller, cheaper kit.
Fine. It may suit YOUR needs but that's all. To claim a generic statement based on YOUR needs is really a simplification. Yes, perhaps you save money but is that the goal? Yes, you save weight, but you also offer something for that saving and you pay the price of the saving elsewhere. Never the less, of course, if it suits your needs... fine.
If you need to take 5 images and create pseudo DR through PP (or in camera) just to get similar DR to a large sensor camera then apart from wasting time you waste memory and need to have a pretty complex work flow and special software.
Complex, ha! Select, hit control-H, wait 60 seconds, done. If that's too much work for you, I suggest you just shoot JPEGs and do no post.
Compared to an image in a fraction of a second, yes 60 seconds is EXTREMELY long time. Honestly, I thought it was faster than that.
"Special" software? Really? You consider Lightroom "special"? It's what 90% of pros and enthusiasts use.
Stitching images is not the same as NOT having to do that to get the same result. It is extra work, regardless how easy you regard it to do or what software you are using. Also remember that most people actually don't use any commercial software but stick to the one coming free of charge and most of those who do use commercial software don't use LR. For those people it is indeed a special software, but of course, LR is not only one which can create HDR and stitch images. Personally I use Adobe CS5 and Nikon Capture NX2, both commercial and CS5 can manage stitching pretty well. Yes, I know they are old but I am very happy with them and they work fine with my cameras and scanners together.
If you take those images hand held then you will definitely not get the same quality as you would from a single image, no matter what kind of IBIS you are using.
Wrong. There is no loss of sharpness or detail from merging an exposure bracket.
Of course there is loss of detail, that is the case every time you have the slightest movement between one and another image, even if you have the worlds most magical IBIS or use the sturdiest tripod. Try a landscape or a macro image and you will (should) see that even in a seemingly perfect, windless day leaves are moving, air is vibrating, birds or insects turn up from nowhere and so on. You need to be in 100% control of the environment to avoid risks for issues.
Now, imagine having to do that for a few hundred images and you should see the advantages of having a camera with larger sensor and more DR. You can never really get the same kind of image by stacking images compared to a single image. HDR is not the same as sensor DR.
Wrong again. See above.
Yes, see above. Especially where you said it takes 60 seconds per image. Now, 100 times 60 seconds is 6000 seconds and that is about 1 hour and 40 minutes. I call that an awful lot of time compared to no time.
You know, I might have been willing to concede a minor point, but your attitude is so rude and hostile that I won't give you the satisfaction.
My attitude is neither rude nor hostile. On the other hand, you made a pretty blanket statement saying that "DR advantage applies only with moving subjects" which is totally wrong and you should know that. It is very strange that you claim to be a professional photographer with loads of experience, even teaching photography, yet you make this statement.
A single image with more DR is always better than having to take 5 images in a row and stitch those, even if you have the best camera ever produced on this earth.
No, it's not. You act as if there is no cost associated with your "better" solution. There is no good reason why I should sink thousands of dollars and carry a larger heavier kit when I can achieve results that are just as good with a minimum of effort. You keep saying the same old boring thing - "better is always better" - as if it's some kind of self-evident universal truth. If you can't see the difference, and the "better" solution carries higher costs, it's not better. Say it a million times, you'll never convince me to switch. because I've already weighed the compromises and found MFT the superior solution for me.
